Boeing Engineer: "What does it mean 'Your anti-virus may be out of date?'"

Boeing Engineer: "What does it mean 'Your anti-virus may be out of date?'"

Anyone who's spent any time working on publicly accessible networks will be aware of the importance of segregation: you keep the public parts of the 'net separate from the private parts. Sadly, nobody bothered to tell Boeing this simple rule.

The company is due to launch the new 787 Dreamliner jet in November 2008, and one of the much-hyped features is in-flight wireless Internet access. Pretty cool, to be able to check your Slashdot rating at 30,000 feet.

The designers at Boeing have made a bit of a boo-boo with this wonderful plan, however: the publicly accessible 'net gateway is also connected to, and shares infrastructure with, the in-flight computer. As in: the control, navigation, and communication infrastructure is connected to the public WiFi cell. A great move, guys. As if that wasn't enough, the system also hooks in to the operating airline's administrative network.

While the public and private parts have a firewall between them, it's not unheard of for firewalls to be hacked. Even the best firewall isn't as secure as physical disconnection, and it's clear that the only reason Boeing decided to join the two systems together was to save money on the network infrastructure within the plane.

Mark Loveless, network security analyst at Autonomic Networks, is suitably worried. As early as 2006 he was alerting people to this sort of thing in a presentation called Hacking the Friendly Skies, in which he warns “This is serious. This isn't a desktop computer. It's controlling the systems that are keeping people from plunging to their deaths. So I hope they are really thinking about how to get this right.

The US Federal Aviation Authority isn't taking these reports lightheartedly, either. In a report available on the FAA website it claims that the design of the system “allows new kinds of passenger connectivity to previously isolated data networks connected to systems that perform functions required for the safe operation of the airplane”, and says that “Because of this new passenger connectivity, the proposed data-network design and integration may result in security vulnerabilities from intentional or unintentional corruption of data and systems critical to the safety and maintenance of the airplane.” The FAA is demanding that Boeing addresses these issues in an eight-point “special conditions” document which, if not met, could mean that the mid-sized jet doesn't get approved for use in the US.

Lori Gunter, a Boeing spokesperson, said the company is employing a number of solutions that should appease the regulators including increased (though still not complete) physical isolation and software-based firewalls. Gunter admits that “"There are places where the networks are not touching, and there are places where they are,” but claims “there are protections in place” to protect critical systems from unauthorised tampering.

Boeing will be conducting in-flight testing of the newly hardened system in March of this year. Let's hope we don't have to run a story about airborne spam, hey?

Is this enough to keep your palmtop in your pocket during a flight, or do you fancy the idea of a remote-control jet? Discuss over in the forums.
Quote rhuitron 9th January 2008, 07:45
Keep my palmtop in my pocket???

Are you kidding me?

Let's make a new Wave point.

Like my house. ;)
Quote Digital-Prozac 9th January 2008, 08:23
Should have used OSX;) They'll be fine as long as they avoid McAfee ;)
Quote Javerh 9th January 2008, 08:30
Knowing that modern flight-computers on Boeings can bypass pilot controls, this freaks me out. Imagine wtc done by script-kiddies.
Quote DarkLord7854 9th January 2008, 08:42
Well, could be a major step forward for flight simulators lmao
Quote D3s3rt_F0x 9th January 2008, 09:24
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
Well, could be a major step forward for flight simulators lmao

I was thinking that get MS flightsim up linked in with the plane fun for all the family lol
Quote samkiller42 9th January 2008, 10:38
I bet Airbus are loving this news after the troubled birth of the A380

Sam
Quote Cupboard 9th January 2008, 10:59
Imagine someone sitting in the plane with a joystick and a laptop controlling the plane! Priceless, unless you are on board and it just happens to be a terrorist...
Quote walle 9th January 2008, 11:01
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javerh
Imagine wtc done by script-kiddies.
Imagine WTC was done by people that couldn’t even fly a Cessna eh, perhaps no need to let the imagination run all to wild by including any so called script-kiddies with joysticks now.
Quote Redbeaver 9th January 2008, 13:56
no thanks. im a system analyst myself, and know that if theres a way, people will find it.

boeing need to make the wireless system completely somehow, 100.00% separated from the flight/navigation system. period. "places that they are (touching)" is not acceptable.

until then, i will always view this as a flaw.
Quote fleole 9th January 2008, 14:15
Until they resolved that by full physical separation, I will not take a dreamliner.

And everyone should refuse to board this kind of plane.
Quote chrisb2e9 9th January 2008, 15:39
wow, for all the thought that went into making a plane like this. I just cant think of anything else to say.
Quote walle 9th January 2008, 17:53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redbeaver
no thanks. im a system analyst myself, and know that if theres a way, people will find it.
No one is questioning the flaw in the design, I’m sure.
Quote DXR_13KE 10th January 2008, 14:54
this cant be real...... no one is that stupid.... why the hell would they let the 2 systems inter-communicate?
Quote Bluephoenix 10th January 2008, 20:29
given how intractable boeing is, something will have to happen before anything will be done about it.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.





Stats: 0.117 seconds